About your Search

20100701
20100731
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
county -- council. >> from the u.s. second circuit court of appeals decision this week, we now hold that the fcc's policy on indecency violates the first amendment, because it is unconstitutionally vague, creating a chilling effect that goes far beyond the fleeting expletives at issue here. carter phillips, you were the lawyer for fox television station. what is the net effect of this decision on in decency? >> i think it takes the law, essentially, back to pacifica, where the supreme court said -- the carline decision -- what it basically says is you should be looking for that shock treatment, repeat statements, as a basis on which to enforced indecency. the second circuit would not have the authority to overrule what the supreme court has said. from that point forward, what the second circuit says is that what the commission has done is so vague and incomprehensible that it is not a basis on which the first amendment will allow you to enforce the decency -- the indecency standards. >> what other decisions have been made since that case -- that is of the case? >> on the question of
, tim o'reilly. while most attendees come from the u.s., some come from all over the world as far as australia. senator lundy is a member of the australian better -- federal parliament and part of an expert -- part of an effort to expand broadband availability throughout australia. >> does the term gov 2.0 mean the same thing in australia as it does in the united states? >> i think it does. people are understanding in using the internet. -- and using the internet. saying gov 2.0 relates it to government. it is helping them understand what we're about. >> is there a desire for those that you serve with and government to get more transparent via technology? >> we have a top-level policy commitment to making did a more sensible by australians and also -- more accessible by all this trillions. -- by all australians. there has been some legislative change recently. we had two acts of parliament -- the freedom of immigration amendment act and the information commissioner act, which both change things. it provides new objectives that make the difficult position of information public and
kind of intensity as you see in the u.s. >> there is concern in this country over decency standards and programming access for younger people. is that debate echoed in europe? >> less so. it is traditionally less of an issue in europe appeared with the ubiquity of all kinds of content on the internet -- in europe. with the ubiquity of all kinds of content on the internet, with governments cooperating, one of the great things is you can create the kind of safe environment for children. we work on those issues. on the regulatory side, it is not such a big issue. we have more discussions about how to make sure the content across different platforms and the intellectual property rights are properly paid for. in europe, you have a lot of separate-language areas. there are small countries, small ipr entities. there are countries who want to capitalize and you have to have a lot of different actors. >> is the united states still the majority producer of content? >> no. hollywood movies are still a bit chunk. european sports is a big driver for premium. normal, national tv viewing, telling
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3